AI Race: US Rejects Slowdown as Congress Stalls on Regulation
The United States has firmly rejected calls for a global pause on advanced artificial intelligence development, even as safety concerns mount and Congress remains deadlocked on regulation. President Donald Trump's stance, framed as a geopolitical contest with China, leaves the world's most powerful AI systems on an accelerated path with minimal oversight, a scenario that carries significant implications for Southeast Asian economies and governance.
Why is the US refusing to slow down on AI?
President Trump has made it clear that technological supremacy takes precedence over precautionary measures. 'Whoever wins AI, wins,' he said, dismissing industry leaders' safety concerns as 'a hoax.' His administration views AI as a critical lever for economic growth and national security, particularly in outpacing China's advances in the field.
This position was reinforced during a September 14 phone call with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, where Trump asserted, 'The robots are not going to be taking over the world.' Huang, whose company designs the world's most advanced AI chips, has consistently downplayed existential risks, aligning with the administration's pro-innovation stance.
What triggered the latest AI safety debate?
The renewed urgency stems from a September 12 essay by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who warned that within six to twelve months, AI could coordinate swarms of autonomous agents capable of taking over the internet. Amodei called for a coordinated slowdown among democratic governments and negotiations with 'authoritarian powers' like China, arguing that voluntary action by individual companies would be insufficient.
His call gained unexpected backing from rivals including OpenAI's Sam Altman, Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis, xAI's Elon Musk, and Microsoft's Satya Nadella, reflecting growing unease within the industry. Recent hacks demonstrating AI agents' ability to conspire against humans have added weight to these concerns.
How has the Trump administration responded to safety calls?
The administration has responded with hostility, framing the slowdown proposal as a self-serving move by established players. David Sacks, Trump's former AI czar, accused Amodei of seeking 'regulatory capture' to cement early-mover advantages. He argued that companies already have the freedom to act responsibly without government mandates, and suggested that liability concerns, not altruism, drive such proposals.
Trump's approach to AI governance has been consistently light-touch. He revoked a Biden-era oversight directive in January 2025, and subsequent executive orders have left model reviews to companies' discretion. The administration has, however, demonstrated a 'kill switch' capability, temporarily banning Anthropic's Mythos 5 and Fable 5 models in June 2026 over cybersecurity concerns, using export control laws due to the absence of AI-specific legislation.
Why is Congress failing to pass AI regulation?
Congress remains deeply divided and technically ill-equipped to address AI governance. With mid-term elections less than seven weeks away, lawmakers face growing public pressure but lack firm plans or political will. Speaker Mike Johnson emphasizes corporate responsibility over legal mandates, while Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries blames Republicans for abdicating their duty.
Proposals floating through the Capitol include addressing catastrophic biological or nuclear risks, banning superintelligent AI, and establishing testing protocols, but none have advanced. Even if Democrats gain majorities in November, Trump's veto power would require a two-thirds majority to override, making swift legislation unlikely.
What is China's position on AI governance?
China has rejected any notion of a slowdown, even as it updates its AI safety framework to mitigate risks to its political system and critical infrastructure. The September 14 update is designed to protect Chinese interests without hampering domestic companies like DeepSeek and Z.AI, which have narrowed the gap with US models.
AI discussions are expected at the Trump-Xi summit on September 24, but substantive agreements appear unlikely. Both nations prioritize technological superiority, though narrow cooperation on issues like cyberattack monitoring remains possible.
What are the implications for Southeast Asia?
For ASEAN economies, the US-China AI race presents both opportunities and risks. The rapid deployment of AI technologies could boost productivity and innovation across the region, but the lack of international safety standards raises concerns about cybersecurity and infrastructure resilience. Singapore's model of pragmatic, innovation-friendly governance offers a potential template for balancing growth with oversight.
Regional policymakers should monitor developments closely, as reactive regulation in the US or China could have spillover effects on trade, investment, and technology transfer. A large-scale AI-enabled disruption, whether to critical infrastructure or financial systems, would likely trigger global regulatory shifts, impacting all economies.
What happens next?
Without legislative action or international cooperation, the world appears headed toward reactive regulation, where policymakers scramble to respond after a major incident. Experts suggest that a large-scale AI-enabled cyberattack or election interference could force the issue, but a proactive safety timeout remains unlikely in the near term.
For now, the AI race continues unabated, with the US and China prioritizing dominance over precaution. Southeast Asia, caught in the middle, must navigate this landscape with strategic foresight, leveraging its position as a neutral hub for innovation and governance.